昨天,，我收到了一封電子郵件,。發(fā)件人對(duì)我在《CEO日?qǐng)?bào)》的開(kāi)場(chǎng)發(fā)言里連續(xù)三天沒(méi)有涉及政治話(huà)題表示了贊美，并期望我繼續(xù)這樣下去,，否則他就要退出了,。我希望我能答應(yīng)他。然而,，今年大選涉及的議題總是與企業(yè)的關(guān)鍵利益掛鉤,。

今天的話(huà)題是克林頓被盜竊的電子郵件的最新下落,。郵件中揭示了克林頓的慈善機(jī)構(gòu)、克林頓的國(guó)務(wù)院和克林頓家族的財(cái)務(wù)狀況是多么緊密地聯(lián)系在一起,。

這一切可能都是合法的——那些把它稱(chēng)作“團(tuán)伙犯罪”的人需要承擔(dān)沉重的舉證責(zé)任,。此外，就如我之前寫(xiě)的那樣，克林頓基金會(huì)顯然為全球做出了許多善舉,。不過(guò)如今毫無(wú)疑問(wèn)——如果曾經(jīng)有過(guò)疑問(wèn)的話(huà)——許多向基金會(huì)捐款的企業(yè)都有意借此影響政府決策,。而且,，這一過(guò)程中,，他們也在為克林頓家族的財(cái)產(chǎn)添磚加瓦——或者，就如某個(gè)助手給出的形象比喻,，建造了“比爾·克林頓公司”。

我這里不闡述政治結(jié)論以及政府需要何種改革,，這個(gè)任務(wù)留給其他人,。不過(guò)許多美國(guó)人已經(jīng)有了自己的結(jié)論：政府系統(tǒng)已經(jīng)被不正當(dāng)?shù)夭倏v了,，而大型企業(yè)正是作弊方。這可能會(huì)導(dǎo)致可怕的后果——上市公司需要公眾的信任才能存活和發(fā)展。為了重新建立這種信任,，商業(yè)領(lǐng)袖需要從根本上重新思考一種辦法來(lái)破壞這種資本主義游戲的合法性,。

對(duì)企業(yè)來(lái)說(shuō),，這里有個(gè)重要,，或者說(shuō),，必要的教訓(xùn),。2016年的大選已經(jīng)證明,，企業(yè)必須贏得的戰(zhàn)役，不是在煙霧不再的密室里的那一場(chǎng)——在那里,，現(xiàn)金捐款和竊竊私語(yǔ)往往會(huì)占得上風(fēng),。值得重視的,，是為了贏得人心的戰(zhàn)役——但人心卻是如今企業(yè)正在失去的,。（財(cái)富中文網(wǎng)）

作者穆瑞瀾（Alan Murray）系《財(cái)富》雜志主編。

譯者：嚴(yán)匡正

I received an email yesterday from a man who praised me for going three straight days without touching politics in the opening essay of CEO Daily, and urged me to continue the trend – else he would cancel. I wish I could comply. But this year’s election keeps kicking up issues of critical interest to business. (Sorry, Tom. We will miss you.)

Today’s topic is the latest stash of stolen Clinton emails, which show just how intricately interwoven the Clinton charity, Clinton State Department, and Clinton family finances really were. I’ll spare you the details, but if you missed it, you can read TIME’s storyhere.

All of this may have been legal—there’s a heavy burden of proof on those who call it a “criminal enterprise.” Moreover, as I’ve written before, the Clinton foundation clearly did good work in the world. But it’s now beyond doubt—if there ever was any—that many of the companies contributing to the foundation were interested in buying influence in Washington. And they also were personally enriching the Clintons in the process—or as one aide has now memorably dubbed it, building “Bill Clinton Inc.”

I’ll leave the political conclusions and needed government reforms to others. But a sizable number of Americans have already come to their own conclusion: the system is rigged and big business is in on the rigging. The potential consequences are dire—public companies need the trust of the public to survive and thrive. To rebuild that trust, business leaders will need to radically rethink an approach that is undermining the legitimacy of capitalism.

There’s an important—or rather, essential—lesson for business here. Election 2016 has shown that the battle business must win is not the one in the no-longer-smoke-filled backrooms – where cash contributions and closeted tête-a-têtes often win the day. The important battle is the one for the public’s heart and mind—and that’s the one business is losing.